Skip to main content
Glama

orgo_get_project

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve project details including computers by name. Returns JSON with project ID, status, creation date, and desktop information.

Instructions

Get project details by name.

Returns full project information including all computers.

Args:
    params (GetProjectInput): Input containing:
        - name (str): Project name to look up

Returns:
    str: JSON with project details:
        {
            "id": str,
            "name": str,
            "status": str,
            "created_at": str,
            "desktops": [{"id": str, "name": str, "status": str, ...}]
        }

Examples:
    - "Get details for my-project" -> params with name="my-project"

Error Handling:
    - Returns "Error: Resource not found..." if project doesn't exist

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: it specifies the return format (JSON with detailed structure), includes error handling for 'Resource not found', and notes that results include 'all computers' (desktops). Annotations cover read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive traits, so the description complements them without contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by organized sections (Args, Returns, Examples, Error Handling). Every sentence adds value, such as clarifying the return format and error cases, with no redundant or verbose content.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter), rich annotations (read-only, idempotent, etc.), and the presence of an output schema (implied by the Returns section), the description is complete. It covers purpose, parameters, return values, examples, and error handling, leaving no gaps for the agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by explaining the 'name' parameter in the Args section and providing an example. However, it doesn't add meaning beyond what's implied by the parameter name (e.g., format constraints or uniqueness), so it meets the baseline for adequate but not exceptional coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('project details by name'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'orgo_list_projects' (which lists multiple projects) and 'orgo_create_project' (which creates rather than retrieves). The title 'Get Project Details' reinforces this clarity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage context by specifying 'by name' and providing an example, suggesting it's for retrieving details of a specific known project. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like 'orgo_list_projects' (for browsing) or 'orgo_get_computer' (for computer-specific details), which would be needed for a perfect score.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/nickvasilescu/orgo-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server